Cyclists without lights - something needs to be done
Discussion
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
What is unobjective is I suspect the video you upload will very surprisingly illustrate that you are right and I am wrong, the multitude of other videos you record that might well tell a different story will likely end up being left on ‘the cutting room floor’.
But we are to believe your story about your 12 year old's count? Is that because it fits your narrative?I'm confident I won't get anywhere near your numbers because that's not what I see. As a person that cycles nearly daily, yes you get the occasional idiot without lights on, but I would estimate maybe 1 in 50.
I also don't see who is saying is not dangerous. I've asked you who is, but you are strangely silent on that too.
So, the question is, is this an issue worth making a whiny post about? Create another issue out of something that's not really an issue? Are you that bored and upset about it? It's a little sad
There are plenty of people in this thread who trivialise the point being made ... 'nothing needs to be done' or the classic 'you can see unlit cyclists easily so it's your driving that's at fault' and other such b
ks. These people are clearly not attributing much, if any, sense of danger to being unlit at night on a bike.Even you describe it as being 'not really an issue' so you seem to be implying that unlit cyclists are not a problem. As for your 1 in 50.... lol frankly! Maybe in the countryside, but in any major city with a good number of cyclists you will see plenty without lights every night without fail as has been stated by several other cyclists here... are they all liars with an agenda too?
All that said at the end of the day it is clear to me that you (like several others here) are far more interested in 'playing the man rather than the ball' in this argument and the thread would be best served by getting back to the topic rather than trying to score points so carry on if you want to, but I'm not really interested in playing games.
Nanook said:
cb1965 said:
but I'm not really interested in playing games.
Funniest thing you've written on this thread. Everyone here knows that's all you're interested in.You don't care about cyclists. Don't pretend.
PS Also love it when the egotists like you say 'everyone here knows...' like you think your opinion is automatically that of everyone else's.
cb1965 said:
Even you describe it as being 'not really an issue' so you seem to be implying that unlit cyclists are not a problem. As for your 1 in 50.... lol frankly! Maybe in the countryside, but in any major city with a good number of cyclists you will see plenty without lights every night without fail as has been stated by several other cyclists here... are they all liars with an agenda too?
All that said at the end of the day it is clear to me that you (like several others here) are far more interested in 'playing the man rather than the ball' in this argument and the thread would be best served by getting back to the topic rather than trying to score points so carry on if you want to, but I'm not really interested in playing games.
I'm the one offering to record an intersection to prove you wrong, and you wont take it. How about 5 minutes at 6pm of the cycle super highway on Millbank at Vauxhall Bridge? I'm sure it is more than 1 in 50, but 33%? Lolz. I'm 150% certain its nowhere near that. And I'm willing to prove it.All that said at the end of the day it is clear to me that you (like several others here) are far more interested in 'playing the man rather than the ball' in this argument and the thread would be best served by getting back to the topic rather than trying to score points so carry on if you want to, but I'm not really interested in playing games.
You have an axe to grind. You dont live in London, and you dont really cycle. You are in these threads (and start a great deal of them) as the champion for the motorist.
Not a single person has said its not dangerous, just like every other cycling topic, no one disputes the dangers or the t
ttish behavior of cyclists. The question of "Something needs to be done"? Does it really? What are the statistics here? On the previous page there is some assertion 2 cyclists killed by a drunk driver, and I quote: " strongly suspect that they wont have had lights and possibly why the pisshead didnt see them", and yet the chap then crashed into a taxi. Did the Taxi not have its lights on too? Did they actually? Would it have made a difference? What was the real problem here?So yeah, I believe cyclists that wont follow common sense and put themselves in danger are stupid. Shall we deploy the reserves to solve this problem? Eh, I'd rather they throw resources at knife crime in London. Or police the line at the Waterloo McDonalds on a Friday and Saturday night from drunk t
ts pushing in.And do cyclists jumping red lights really warrant an entire massively costly registration and numberplating system? Really?
Nanook said:
cb1965 said:
You're a bit late, the personal attacks and stupid comments started on page 2!
PS Also love it when the egotists like you say 'everyone here knows...' like you think your opinion is automatically that of everyone else's.
No, the stupid comments started on page 1. The first post actually.PS Also love it when the egotists like you say 'everyone here knows...' like you think your opinion is automatically that of everyone else's.
And really, there's nothing egotistical about me pointing out how much of a t
t you like to be about cyclists, because you find it fun. You've admitted it before, so you're fooling no-one now.
Anyway you carry on with the insults if it helps! I'll live!
PS The ego thing... I think a psychologist would argue otherwise on the 'everyone thinks like you' front, but you carry on believing otherwise as .. well with your ego.. you know best
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
Even you describe it as being 'not really an issue' so you seem to be implying that unlit cyclists are not a problem. As for your 1 in 50.... lol frankly! Maybe in the countryside, but in any major city with a good number of cyclists you will see plenty without lights every night without fail as has been stated by several other cyclists here... are they all liars with an agenda too?
All that said at the end of the day it is clear to me that you (like several others here) are far more interested in 'playing the man rather than the ball' in this argument and the thread would be best served by getting back to the topic rather than trying to score points so carry on if you want to, but I'm not really interested in playing games.
I'm the one offering to record an intersection to prove you wrong, and you wont take it. How about 5 minutes at 6pm of the cycle super highway on Millbank at Vauxhall Bridge? I'm sure it is more than 1 in 50, but 33%? Lolz. I'm 150% certain its nowhere near that. And I'm willing to prove it.All that said at the end of the day it is clear to me that you (like several others here) are far more interested in 'playing the man rather than the ball' in this argument and the thread would be best served by getting back to the topic rather than trying to score points so carry on if you want to, but I'm not really interested in playing games.
You have an axe to grind. You dont live in London, and you dont really cycle. You are in these threads (and start a great deal of them) as the champion for the motorist.
Not a single person has said its not dangerous, just like every other cycling topic, no one disputes the dangers or the t
ttish behavior of cyclists. The question of "Something needs to be done"? Does it really? What are the statistics here? On the previous page there is some assertion 2 cyclists killed by a drunk driver, and I quote: " strongly suspect that they wont have had lights and possibly why the pisshead didnt see them", and yet the chap then crashed into a taxi. Did the Taxi not have its lights on too? Did they actually? Would it have made a difference? What was the real problem here?So yeah, I believe cyclists that wont follow common sense and put themselves in danger are stupid. Shall we deploy the reserves to solve this problem? Eh, I'd rather they throw resources at knife crime in London. Or police the line at the Waterloo McDonalds on a Friday and Saturday night from drunk t
ts pushing in.And do cyclists jumping red lights really warrant an entire massively costly registration and numberplating system? Really?
This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
billshoreham said:
cb1965 said:
Fair enough, but I really don't generalise about all cyclists, I think it might feel like that as I do tend to give as good as I get when things kick off in here, but my complaint is with those that behave like idiots just as it is with drivers in the same boat. I think, as an occasional cyclist myself, I am just genuinely astounded at how little self preservation some of them seem to exhibit. My biggest complaint on the lights front is that I really couldn't imagine how I'd feel if I hit one... I know others on here have said it wouldn't bother them if they were in the right, but it would me.... a lot. I was trying to work it out the other day, but I reckon I've driven close to 1.5 million miles in my life and I've been very lucky to only have had one accident and that was at the hands of a drunk driver... I've never hit a pedestrian or a cyclist .... I really don't want to start now.
I really like that.Edited by cb1965 on Sunday 11th November 03:17
cb makes a point, unlike the above point with which I agree, there are some where I don't and some where perhaps he doesn't put it very well but there is a kernel of something in there.
Yet time and time again there is an element who make absolutely no comment about the substantive issue raised, either for or against, no evidence or on topic discussion, simply straight into an ad hom attack presumably because it's cb and/or critical of some cycle users.
You can see it time and time again on this and other threads. Gents, really does your cause no favours.
From my personal experience, not representative, the dark nights around uni campus and the surrounding roads are a nightmare for unlit bicycle users. I can't bring myself to call them cyclists, equally pedestrians in black with face buried in a phone. One walked out directly in front of me the other night, good job sticking to the 10mph limit and had seen her as she walked through a lit patch earlier. Otherwise just a flaky shadow.
But what about defective car lights incoming... Yes they are t
ts too.Edited by FiF on Monday 12th November 10:13
I see more cars without proper lighting for the conditions than I do cyclists on my 22 mile drive to work.
On the cycling perspective, your damned either way, there have been incidents (find them on Youtube) of drivers deliberately hitting cyclists and then blaming their rear lights for being too bright or flashy. My hybrid has the same rear light as in one of those videos (the Lunar R2).
Nanook said:
cb1965 said:
Yep, suggesting cycling without lights is not a good idea is stupid obviously.
Anyway you carry on with the insults if it helps! I'll live!
PS The ego thing... I think a psychologist would argue otherwise on the 'everyone thinks like you' front, but you carry on believing otherwise as .. well with your ego.. you know best
Again, it's not egotistical if I'm merely stating facts. You've admitted in the past to starting threads just to try and wind up cyclists. When I say 'everyone can see', it's not me making an assumption on everyone's behalf. It's just that you've literally typed it, and it's there for everyone to see. It's pathetic. Please, get a hobby, it'll be good for you.Anyway you carry on with the insults if it helps! I'll live!
PS The ego thing... I think a psychologist would argue otherwise on the 'everyone thinks like you' front, but you carry on believing otherwise as .. well with your ego.. you know best
Maybe take up cycling.
That's a text book definition of being egotistical!
Maybe get a hobby where you have to interact with other more normal people, it'll be good for you.
Maybe take up driving.
cb1965 said:
Hang on a minute. Don't start attributing me with comments about the two cyclists in the accident near Manchester as having had no lights as I have said no such thing. The report doesn't mention anything about them having lights or not and I'm not getting involved in that one so stop implying that I have said anything about it as next up will be another of your chums attacking me for it becuase of what you have written.
This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Read that again and tell me where I said you did or even attribute it to you. You seem quick to point out everyone else's comprehension problem, and then say this. I didnt say you said it, but its in support of your side of the argument.This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Now, care for the rest of the post?
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
Hang on a minute. Don't start attributing me with comments about the two cyclists in the accident near Manchester as having had no lights as I have said no such thing. The report doesn't mention anything about them having lights or not and I'm not getting involved in that one so stop implying that I have said anything about it as next up will be another of your chums attacking me for it becuase of what you have written.
This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Read that again and tell me where I said you did or even attribute it to you. You seem quick to point out everyone else's comprehension problem, and then say this. I didnt say you said it, but its in support of your side of the argument.This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Now, care for the rest of the post?
cb1965 said:
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
Hang on a minute. Don't start attributing me with comments about the two cyclists in the accident near Manchester as having had no lights as I have said no such thing. The report doesn't mention anything about them having lights or not and I'm not getting involved in that one so stop implying that I have said anything about it as next up will be another of your chums attacking me for it becuase of what you have written.
This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Read that again and tell me where I said you did or even attribute it to you. You seem quick to point out everyone else's comprehension problem, and then say this. I didnt say you said it, but its in support of your side of the argument.This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Now, care for the rest of the post?
This is why there is no point to these "debates". You threads and posts are either nothing but trolling, or the result of someone with some serious issues in life. I'd suggest figuring out what it is and getting help. Maybe you just miss London?
Killboy said:
cb1965 said:
Hang on a minute. Don't start attributing me with comments about the two cyclists in the accident near Manchester as having had no lights as I have said no such thing. The report doesn't mention anything about them having lights or not and I'm not getting involved in that one so stop implying that I have said anything about it as next up will be another of your chums attacking me for it becuase of what you have written.
This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Read that again and tell me where I said you did or even attribute it to you. You seem quick to point out everyone else's comprehension problem, and then say this. I didnt say you said it, but its in support of your side of the argument.This is when this place is toxic ... when the likes of you trying to imply this sort of thing just so you can generate more ill feeling.
It's not on frankly.
Now, care for the rest of the post?
Mave said:
Mad isn't it? Cbeebies starts a post referring to the opinion of "the usual mob", calls people out on opinions they haven't expressed, then complains "it's not on" and that people implying things "makes the place toxic". One day, maybe, we can have a conversation about cycling related issues without people like Cbeebies kicking off right from the start then trying to play "holier than thou" when it goes downhill.
Yup. This is actually funny and sad at the same time.Killboy said:
Wow. You really do dodge any actual conversation or question dont you?
This is why there is no point to these "debates". You threads and posts are either nothing but trolling, or the result of someone with some serious issues in life. I'd suggest figuring out what it is and getting help. Maybe you just miss London?
I'm not dodging anything, but I'm not prepared to let you attribute me supporting a viewpoint that I don't support by chucking it into a post in the full knowledge that another of your cronies will pick it up and treat it as gospel. The fact you are prepared to use the death of a cyclist to try and score points is pretty low frankly. This is why there is no point to these "debates". You threads and posts are either nothing but trolling, or the result of someone with some serious issues in life. I'd suggest figuring out what it is and getting help. Maybe you just miss London?
Killboy said:
Mave said:
Mad isn't it? Cbeebies starts a post referring to the opinion of "the usual mob", calls people out on opinions they haven't expressed, then complains "it's not on" and that people implying things "makes the place toxic". One day, maybe, we can have a conversation about cycling related issues without people like Cbeebies kicking off right from the start then trying to play "holier than thou" when it goes downhill.
Yup. This is actually funny and sad at the same time.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff